Today I was sat on the M6 between junctions 34 & 35 for almost two hours waiting for the Police to clear an accident which included the motorway being shut in both directions due to helicopter landings.

I mentioned to a driver beside me, whilst stood on the carriageway, that no matter how long we were inconvenienced it was nothing compared to those involved in the accident or the emergency services needed to clean up the mess so we should consider ourselves fortunate.

I have every respect for the Police and the emergency services having to attend incidents such as these, especially serious accidents which might involve fatalities.

However what does raise a question is that after the incident was cleared there was what appeared to be a police car on a bridge about a mile or so further on taking the opportunity to clock cars who were obviously trying to make up for lost time. Would it have been there had the incident not happened?

Now, the issue I am wrestling with here is that although these drivers were speeding,(hopefully not myself as I was doing a steady 72/74 when I spotted it), did they deserve to get nabbed or were the police taking a cynical and unfair advantage of a situation? I've got to be honest and say that in my opinion they deserved it, but others I have spoken to disagree.

After all, maybe speed played a part in the accident in the first place and as such should be punished.

What do you think?

Well I will tell yoo what I think and that is that the police car might not have been clocking cars who were speeding, because I have seen a speed trap in place in the lake district on a bridge and they had three speed cameras, mounted on tripods, one for each lane, so what makes you think that the police car you saw today was 'clocking' what speed the cars were doing and was the bridge on a motorway junction allowing the bobby to get on to the motorway to chase and catch the offending vehicle

Maybe you are right Tommy but there was obviously a wide lensed camera being pointed out of the side window of the estate car. However, I would like to think that you are right and I am wrong.

Faith in humanity and all that, but I doubt it.

Well without knowing the cause of the accident I would think they, after clearing up not only the practical mess off the road, the police have had to help put someone together again then that is all the more reason they would want pull people over who are exceeding the speed limit.
Stick to the rules of the road then there will be no need to stop drivers. Also isn't the speed limit 70 mph

Speed and careless/dangerous driving being one of the biggest causes of RTC's

Can't disagree berylh and yes you are right but very few people do 70 (that doesn't excuse it but it is fact),

I have an oldish car and the speedo is renowned for over reading.

Better than under reading isn't 0 years.
Whenever I get into discussions about speed limits about 95% say - if limit is 50 you can do 60 etc., So that certainly gives the police plenty scope.

TTT said, "... I have seen a speed trap in place in the lake district on a bridge and they had three speed cameras, mounted on tripods, one for each lane ..."

But there is no three-lane motorway in the Lake District?

You know beryl, going off at a tangent here, when my son first got a car he had a "black box" fitted which monitored his driving to ensure that he didn't speed and he had good driving habits.

On occasion I used his car and ensured that I obeyed the speed limits perfectly. As a result it educated me to stick to the speed limit and is a habit that I have continued to do (mostly).

My son is a far better driver than me because of his early indoctrination and always sticks to the speed limits even now without a box. When I am behind a young person who is doing bang on 30, I am always patient as they too might have a box. I feel that when anyone passes their test they should be made to have a "black box" for two years after the test. Driving habits amongst the young would increase dramatically and continue into adulthood.

A few weeks ago we were in Scotland and on our way home the road was shut due to a serious accident. We had to turn round and go back the way we had came after over 2hrs we were nearly were we started from when the road in that direction was shut again due to an accident. We got past this accident and headed home which took us 10hrs instead of approx 6hrs but we got home in one piece and are still enjoying life. No rush no agro

Police no time for them , i think they should sod off and try and cut the more serious offences such as burglries/ children not being able to play with bloody paedo's about get out of them cars start foot patrol's ,get um bycycles,instead of cushy cars, as for the motorways the speed limit of 70mph is a joke it should be at the least between 75mph and 85 mph as most vehicles today labour at 70 and has some one has said nobody does 70mph today do they ??

Most vehicles labour at 70 my ARSE.

Tonker

Yoo are daft you, Southbound carriageway and the bridge was nowhere near a junction and I was hoofing it a bit, so it was slam on and hope I was under the limit they had set for that session, so an anxious few days wait to see if a fixed penalty or summons appeared which it didn't

OK noddy or big ears i suppose i was carried away but please try and curb your language we dont like it.

Re cameras on major roads - drivers complain bitterly that they have to slow down when they see the cameras. If people behaved like there were cameras all the way there wouldn't be a problem .... would there, certainly no need to keep having to slow down

Posted by: GOLDEN BEAR (2708) [View GOLDEN BEAR's page] [2,500+] Report abuse

OK noddy or big ears i suppose i was carried away but please try and curb your language we dont like it.

Replied: 19th Jun 2017 at 18:39


Yes noddy, next time substitute the word with asterisks like GB does.

TTT - there's no motorway in the Lake District!